Archive for the ‘Legal Issues’ Category

DIVERSITY DELUSIONS AT NORTH CAROLINA

Monday, February 11th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Diversity Delusions at North Carolina

Like Harvard, the school has trouble defending an admissions policy that ill-serves minority students.

Feb. 11, 2019

The University of North Carolina campus in Chapel Hill, N.C.
The University of North Carolina campus in Chapel Hill, N.C. PHOTO: GETTY IMAGES

Harvard isn’t the only university defending its discriminatory admissions policies in court. Its nonprofit adversary, Students for Fair Admissions, filed a similar complaint against the University of North Carolina in 2014. UNC’s initial defense, submitted last month, is a case study in the willful ignorance underlying the racial-preference regime in higher education. Above all, schools like Harvard and UNC have deliberately ignored the negative effects of preferences on their supposed beneficiaries.

UNC told the court it needs to employ racial double standards in admissions because “certain classes, fields, or areas of campus” lack black and Hispanic students. Though UNC didn’t elaborate, the subjects deficient in underrepresented minorities undoubtedly include science, technology, engineering and math—the so-called STEM fields.

UNC has it backward: Racial preferences aren’t the solution to black and Hispanic underrepresentation in STEM, they are a cause of it. Admitting students with academic qualifications significantly below those of their peers puts them at a disadvantage, whatever their race. Students who are catapulted by preferences into schools for which they are academically mismatched struggle to keep up in classrooms where the teaching is pitched above their level of preparation. Studies have shown that African-American and Hispanic freshmen in preference-practicing schools who intend to major in STEM switch into softer majors at a high rate once they realize their fellow students are much better prepared to do the work. Had those students enrolled in schools that matched their level of preparation, they would be more likely to graduate with a STEM degree.

(more…)

Share

LATE TERM ABORTION – BEWARE GRAPHIC VIDEO AND TWO ARTICLES

Friday, February 8th, 2019

 

There are two articles and one video link in this email.  All deal with late term abortion.  The video is an animated video of how a late term abortion is done and is really very upsetting.  The first article is ” It is Never Necessary to Kill Baby for Health, Life of Mother ” where doctors and nurses speak out on this issue.
The second article is regarding the bill that was introduced by Republicans  in the House to give medical aid to a baby that survives an abortion.  Democrats blocked that bill.   How much lower can the Democrats go ?   
Thanks to Cindy Chuey and Charlie Hendrix for sharing these articles and video.  Nancy

OB/GYNs, Nurses Speak Out Against NY Abortion Law: It Is Never Necessary to Kill Baby for Health, Life of Mother

By Heather Clark on  January 28, 201936 Comments

A number of pro-life obstetricians and nurses nationwide have spoken out against the New York Reproductive Health Act signed into law by Gov. Andrew Cuomo last week, which not only codifies the “right” to an abortion, but also allows mothers to obtain an abortion past the 24-week mark and without limitation if the child in their womb is not expected to survive, or to “protect” the mother’s health or life.

“Every individual who becomes pregnant has the fundamental right to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child, or to have an abortion,” the Reproductive Health Act, signed into law on Tuesday, reads in part. “A health care practitioner … may perform an abortion when … the patient is within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or there is an absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.”

The language reflects the 1973 Supreme Court ruling of Roe v. Wade, in which Justice Harry Blackmun, nominated to the bench by Republican president Richard Nixon, wrote, “If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability [written in the ruling to be as early as 24 weeks], it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.”

“I want to clear something up so that there is absolutely no doubt,” Dr. Omar Hamada of Tennessee, who outlined that he has delivered more than 2,500 babies, wrote on social media on Wednesday. “There’s not a single fetal or maternal condition that requires third trimester abortion. Not one. Delivery, yes. Abortion, no. There is absolutely no medical reason to kill a near term or term infant. For any reason.”

“If there’s a problem—and there are problems in the third trimester, both with the babies and with the mom that require delivery—just deliver the baby. We don’t have to kill it,” Hamada further explained to Fox News.

Dr. David McKnight, also of Tennessee, likewise said that if a concern arises, the baby is simply delivered via C-section. There is no need to kill the child to save the mother.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – CORRUPTION AT THE DEPT OF JUSTICE – MARK LEVIN AND SIDNEY POWELL

Thursday, February 7th, 2019

 

 How can we possibly have trust in our Justice Department after hearing the information in this video ?   Nancy
VIDEO – SIDNEY POWELL AND MARK LEVIN ON DOJ CORRUPTION

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk-3uaGZsM8

Sidney Powell  –  bio

Sidney PowellSidney Powell was a federal prosecutor in three districts under nine U.S. Attorneys from both political parties, then in private practice for more than 20 years. She is past-president of the Bar Association of the Fifth Federal Circuit and of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers. A veteran of 500 federal appeals, she published LICENSED TO LIE: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice, the true inside story of the corrupted prosecutions of Ted Stevens, Arthur Andersen LLP, Merrill Lynch executives, and many others. In addition to practicing law, Ms. Powell is now Senior Policy Advisor on Justice Reform for America First and a Senior Fellow of the London Center for Policy Research.

The book LICENSED TO LIE focuses on abusive prosecutors—all of whom rose to very powerful positions in the government. The book’s most prominent villain now leads Robert Mueller’s task force investigating the 2106 presidential election. It has recently been discussed by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich on Cavuto, Hannity, Fox & Friends, with Bill Hemmer, on MSNBC, and on NPR. The book was also featured by John Stossel in a segment of one of his shows on Washington Overlords.

(more…)

Share

RED STATE/BLUE STATE DIVIDE

Tuesday, February 5th, 2019

 

Navigating the Great Divide

By Stephen Moore    January 8, 2019
 In the months after the election of Donald Trump, there was a mini-political movement in California to get the Golden State to secede from the Union.It didn’t get off the ground, though during a recent trip to Northern California, many of the people I met were still so distraught over the Trump presidency that were he to win re-election, secession would be much more seriously pursued. A majority of Californians don’t want to be governed by Donald Trump, and many liberal leaders and talking heads openly compare him to Adolf Hitler.

What if we arrived at a point where a solid majority of Californians wanted independence (and perhaps states like Washington and Oregon sought to join them)? Should they have the moral and constitutional right to do so? Would the other states ever impose military control over Californians to keep them in the Union?

The standard response is this issue was settled during the Civil War. Really? What the Civil War proved was that the North had more military might than the South. Imagine that it were the South in 1860 that held the political and military advantage to impose its will over the North, and moved to legalize the evil of slavery everywhere. Would the North have been morally wrong to secede?

The issue of secession takes on renewed vigor now given the British exit from the European Union. The EU allowed a fairly orderly process for allowing nations to leave the EU governing structure. The political tide in many places around the world appears to be for self-rule and sovereignty.

In America, the deepening and perhaps irreversible red state-blue state schism deserves immediate attention. We as a nation are more divided on ideological, cultural, economic and geographical lines than at any time since the Civil War. Look at the electoral map from recent elections.

(more…)

Share

TECHNOLOGY VERSUS THE WALL

Monday, February 4th, 2019

 

Has anyone suggested “armed drones”  ?  They would certainly get the attention of
those who are illegally crossing our border !   Nancy

Democrats who killed Bush’s ‘virtual fence’ now back ‘technological wall’ at border

by S. A. Miller

January 13, 2019
Bush’ ‘virtual fence’ killed by Obama

The Department of Homeland Security spent seven years and more than $1 billion trying to create a wall of technology at the border — or, as President George W. Bush called it, a “virtual fence.” It was a bust.

Now the idea has returned as the main ante for congressional Democrats in the border security spending fight. Opposed to President Trump’s physical barriers, they say drones, sensors and other electronics are all the tools needed — a “technological wall,” in the words of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat.

The Obama administration in 2011 pulled the plug on the Bush-era Secure Border Initiative Network, or SBINet, which was envisioned as an integrated system of radar, sensors and video cameras along the entire U.S.-Mexico border.

Democrats at the time cheered the decision to cancel the contract with Boeing for the long-troubled program.

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat who was the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, called SBINet a “grave and expensive disappointment” for squandering a little more than $1 billion to achieve just 53 miles of coverage on the border in Arizona.

Mr. Thompson, who now chairs the committee, said last week that he is ready to try again rather than spend on Mr. Trump’s corrugated steel fence.

“I have been engaging the tech community. They are telling me that they are developing modern technology that will help us identify those vulnerabilities. I would like for us to go in that direction,” he said on “PBS NewsHour.”

He said U.S. Customs and Border Protection already have high-tech sensors that just need to be used in a better way.

The Washington Times asked Mr. Thompson’s office what had changed since 2011 and whether he fully backed Mrs. Pelosi’s “technological wall.”

“He does support proven and effective technology to be used at the border where appropriate. SBINet simply did not work, was not deployed correctly and was overly ambitious,” said Thompson spokesman Adam Comis.

The border security debate and Mr. Trump’s demand for $5.7 billion for a border fence are at the heart of the standoff between the White House and Democrats that has kept the government partially shut down for more than three weeks.

Border security analysts agree that the technology has improved by leaps and bounds since 2011, but they disagree on whether sensors and remote imaging can substitute for physical barriers.

Jay F. Nunamaker Jr., director of the National Center for Border Security and Immigration at the University of Arizona, had no doubt that technology could replace walls and fences.

“The combination of all the cameras, night vision cameras, you could see people walking through marshes and streams like it was bright daylight,” he said, recalling a 2013 visit to a border security command center set up at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson.

“Technology has only improved since then,” he said.

National security scholar James R. Phelps, co-author of the 2014 book “Border Security,” said the question isn’t whether the technology works in detecting border jumpers — it does.

“The question then becomes, ‘Do they actually stop anybody?’ The answer to that is no,” he said. “It is definitely not a substitute. It works in conjunction with physical barriers.”

A big difference between sensors and fences, he said, is where Border Patrol agents apprehend smugglers or illegal immigrants. The high-tech sensors and video cameras don’t prevent or hamper illegal border crossings.

“Once they are on U.S. soil, inside the United States of America, you now have to go through all the legal processes and administrative processes,” said Mr. Phelps. “You have to determine if they are here legally or illegally, collect the biometrics to put through the criminal check systems, detain them or arrest them, set them up for a deportation hearing, put them in front of a judge, potentially house them, treat them medically. The list goes on and on and on — with all the expenses associated with that person once they set foot in the United States.”

The scenario also depends on Border Patrol agents apprehending border jumpers after they appear on video screens.

“It does no good to detect illegal crossings unless someone is available to track them down, and fairly quickly, before the crossers disappear into the many private homes, farms, businesses, vehicles and natural hiding places that are in the border areas, often very close to the border,” said Jessica M. Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies. “Technology by itself does not prevent anyone from crossing the way a real wall or fence does.”

(more…)

Share

SOCIAL JUSTICE MOVEMENT IN OUR UNIVERSITIES

Thursday, January 24th, 2019

 

 

Here is an example of what is happening in colleges and universities.

“DREAMers: How a Youth Movement Challenged Immigrant Rights Orthodoxy” by Prof. Enid Trucios-Haynes, UofL’s Brandeis School of Law

This presentation will discuss the rise of an immigrant rights movement led by undocumented youth over the past decade. In the mid-2000s, undocumented young people came out of the shadows and declared themselves to be undocumented and unafraid. They sought legislation, the DREAM Act, to provide legal status for those who came to the U.S. as children and had become undocumented when they turned eighteen. They challenged the negative dehumanizing terminology of “illegal aliens” by identifying DREAMers as exceptional students, and later by uniting through the creation of national coalitional organizations. After marching in Washington D.C. in 2010, these youth activists used civil disobedience tactics to petition Congress directly for the DREAM Act. Youth activists became empowered to speak for themselves, their undocumented parents, and the entire undocumented community in the U.S. Their progressive agenda, seeking dignity, respect, and recognition, led President Obama to create the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Program after Congress refused to act. Although this program does not provide legal status, and is currently in limbo due to litigation, undocumented young people — now out of the shadows — continue to build the movement and coalitions to challenge the restrictionist immigration policies of the Trump Administration.

This is part of a 6-week short course that offers historical and contemporary perspectives on a variety of social justice movements. Six scholars from the University of Louisville’s Anne Braden Institute for Social Justice Research and Muhammad Ali Institute for Peace and Justice will explore aspects of social movement-building on topics such as racial justice, youth-led immigrant justice, LGBTQ rights, and solidarity, among others. 

This class is free and open to the public, but registration is required. Call 502-574-1623 to reserve your spot.

Location: Louisville Free Public Library

Main Library
301 York St.
Louisville, KY 40203

Date & Location

Date: 1/24/2019
Time: 6:30 PM to 8:00 PM
Share

NORTH CAROLINA SHERIFFS, DEALING WITH CARTEL VIOLENCE AND DRUGS, CALL FOR CONGRESS TO FUND WALL

Thursday, January 3rd, 2019

 

North Carolina Sheriffs, Dealing With Cartel Violence, Call for Congress to Fund Wall

January 1, 2019 Updated: January 2, 2019

More than 1,400 miles north of the southwest border, sheriffs are battling drug trafficking, overdoses, gang and cartel violence, and human trafficking.

“If something gets through the border, within a few days, two or three days, it’s across this country,” said Rockingham County Sheriff Sam Page.

Sheriffs in North Carolina are calling on Congress to approve funding for a border wall and better border security.

North Carolina has become a major hub for the transport and distribution of wholesale cocaine and other drugs throughout the northeastern corridor, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

Page said he does what he can to support the sheriffs situated in counties along the southwest border.

“If we can support them, it prevents a lot of those drugs from coming in and getting into our communities here in the interior United States,” Page said.

“If we fail to secure our borders, every sheriff in America will become a border sheriff.”

Alamance County Sheriff Terry Johnson said his county has huge problems with the Sinaloa cartel and its drug trafficking operations.

Alamance is right on the intersection of two major interstates, I-40 and I-95, and nearby city Greensboro has become the drug trafficking hub for the southeastern United States, Johnson said.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO ISLAMIC FUNDING TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS

Wednesday, January 2nd, 2019

 

VIDEO

Terror-Funding Case Being Prosecuted?

Share

THE COST OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION – STATE BY STATE

Sunday, December 30th, 2018

State by state detailed infographics on how much illegals burden you and your state:

Alabama Kentucky North
Dakota
Alaska Louisiana Ohio
Arizona Maine Oklahoma
Arkansas Maryland Oregon
California Massachusetts Pennsylvania
Colorado Michigan Rhode Island
Connecticut Minnesota South Carolina
Delaware Mississippi South Dakota
District of Columbia Missouri Tennessee
Florida Montana Texas
Georgia Nebraska Utah
Hawaii Nevada Vermont
Idaho New Hampshire Virginia
Illinois New Jersey Washington
Indiana New Mexico West Virginia
Iowa New York Wisconsin
Kansas North
Carolina
Wyoming

 

 

 

Share

FUND THE BORDER WALL – CALL YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS

Wednesday, December 19th, 2018
If you feel strongly that our country needs a secure border and that the border wall should be funded and built, call your senators and representatives in congress and let them know.  You will be able to locate the contact information for your individual officials on the following link.   President Trump needs our support on this critical issue.  Nancy
Share
Search All Posts
Categories